|
we/our
), which asserts the collective identity
of the party and nation, e.g.
The terrorists who threaten us around the world will
never give up if we give up. It is a test of will and belief, and we can’t fail it
, with his
personal voice (
I/my
) concerned with the evaluation – approval of disapproval –
of his acts and decisions, e.g.
And I decided we should stand shoulder to shoulder
with our oldest ally. And I did so out of belief.
This interplay of the institutional
142
and the personal identity of the speaker is constructed coherently throughout the
discourse, with the personal voice prevailing in the closure:
I give my thanks to
you, the British people, for the times that I have succeeded, and my apologies to
you for the times I have fallen short. But good luck.
3. Representing the present as a natural extension of the past
Evoking history and continuity is one of the emblematic persuasive strategies
used in American inaugural addresses. The inaugural address reflects the moment
when, by his/her inauguration, the President-elect is transformed from a party
leader in the partisan struggle into a head of government and state, President of
all Americans, who acquires an institutional identity and can use the institutional
voice for the first time (cf. Trosborg 2000). Despite the differences in the rhetorical
style of the politicians who have delivered the speech, inaugural addresses share
numerous characteristic features stemming from the symbolic character of the
act of inauguration and the need to construct the institutional identity and voice
of the new President. As evidenced by (3a) and (3b) taken from the inaugural
speeches of Barack Obama and George Bush respectively, both presidents
explicitly refer to the act of taking the oath as a symbol of a continuity from
the past to the present and future; they evoke their ancestors to claim their right
to be part of the tradition of American leadership and thus assert the existential
coherence of the institution. In Obama’s speech, this continuity is highlighted
by the repetitive pattern of
So it has been; so it must be with this generation
of Americans
(cf. Trosborg’s iconicity), which presents this state of affairs as
natural and inevitable. The temporal frame serves as a basis for the coherence of
actors, actions and events mentioned in the discourse world as represented in the
speech. In addition, both politicians enhance the dialogicity of their discourse by
using similar and conventional expressive vocabulary items –
humbled
,
grateful
and
honoured
– to disclose to the audience their state of mind.
(3a)
My fellow citizens:
I stand here today humbled by the task before us, grateful for the trust
you’ve bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors. […]
Forty-four Americans have now taken the presidential oath. The words
have been spoken during rising tides of prosperity and the still waters
of peace. Yet, every so often, the oath is taken amidst gathering clouds
and raging storms. At these moments, America has carried on not simply
because of the skill or vision of those in high office, but because we, the
people, have remained faithful to the ideals of our forebears and true to
our founding documents.
So it has been; so it must be with this generation of Americans.
(Obama, Inaugural address, 2009)
143
(3b)
The peaceful transfer of authority is rare in history, yet common in our
country. With a simple oath, we affirm old traditions and make new
beginnings.[…]
I am honored and humbled to stand here, where so many of America’s
leaders have come before me, and so many will follow. We have a place,
all of us, in a long story – a story we continue, but whose end we will not
see.
(Bush, Inaugural address, 2001)
Although both presidents represent the present as a natural extension of the
past, they differ in the way they construct their institutional
identity and voice
as they thread these into their discourse. Bush represents himself as one in a
sequence of
so many of America’s leaders
and, in a way, similarly to Blair’s
concern in his resignation speech, seems to be preoccupied with his place in
history. Although clearly ambiguous, his use of
we
in
We have a place, all of
us, in a long story,
by proximity readily invites America’s leaders as referent,
rather than the American people. On the other hand, Obama’s rhetoric constructs
a presidential identity which is closely associated with the American people; by
assuming the voice of
we, the people,
Obama not only uses intertextuality to
enhance credibility by appealing to the authority of the constitution, but also
claims the right to speak on behalf of the people as in his election slogan
Yes
we can
. Rather than focusing on the leaders, Obama evokes the challenges that
the country has faced and its achievements, which are attributed not only to the
leadership, but to all Americans who have remained
faithful to the ideals of our
forebears and true to our founding documents
, i.e. existentially coherent. The
opening of his speech also coheres thanks to the contrastive cohesion relation
holding between the metaphorical expressions
rising tides of prosperity and
the still waters of peace
and
gathering clouds and raging storms
and
those
in high office
and
we,
the people
. It is rather emblematic that Obama uses the
traditionally distal demonstrative
those
to refer to the presidents and the proximal
we
, including the speaker, to refer to the people.
While the foundations of the speaker’s identity and voice as well of his/her
relationships with the audience are set in the opening part of political speeches,
their construal continues in the body of the speech. Persuasion is coherently
embedded in the discourse to represent the speaker as a credible and reliable
political actor willing to share his views and knowledge with the audience. This
allows the speaker to assert his/her existential coherence by representing his/
her behaviour and attitude to people, values, facts and ideas as consistent and
continuous and set the ideological perspective for coherent evaluation of political
actors, actions and events represented in the discourse world.
144
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
